I used your guide quite a bit in conjunction with a bunch of other resources. I lucked out in that this curve was -2 for a 180.

But I did it -- thanks for the guide. I thought you would appreciate knowing that!

Maybe I'll write my own guide, so others can learn from me like I learned from all of you.

If you could also contribute to that "great advice for scoring 160+" thread, that would be great. I'm like incredibly jealous of you, but I'm taking my first LSAT in October and posts like this motivate the hell out of me (so thanks!).

Sure man. Super weird feeling right now.. but I'll get around to it in the next few days.

NoodleyOne wrote:Getting confident in RC, even if you can't -0 it regularly like LR and LG, is key to a successful exam.

Keep up the work but don't let it consume you, either. This is an important thing to realize. You have to have a life outside of the LSAT. The goal is to walk into and out of the test knowing you prepared as best you could, and performed at your best on the test day.

I took 10 practice tests and looked over The Princeton Review's "Cracking the LSAT" in order to prepare for the June LSAT. I scored a 162, but had no idea how underprepared I was until I wandered upon this thread. I just purchased all of the materials you suggested and look forward to tackling the LSAT this October. I hope with these study habits I will break into 170's and get into the school of my dreams. Will update when scores come in late October...

Trying to use lsatqa.com by going to the link that provides breakdown of types of questions. Not sure if I'm using it right.Some types of questions (such as flaw) appear more frequently in a section and the link at lsatgrader->Qtypes only provides cumulative mistakes for each type in a graph with circles representing question types. Since the link does not show how performance improved for a certain type of question, is this the right way to use lsatq?

jmjm wrote:Trying to use lsatqa.com by going to the link that provides breakdown of types of questions. Not sure if I'm using it right.Some types of questions (such as flaw) appear more frequently in a section and the link at lsatgrader->Qtypes only provides cumulative mistakes for each type in a graph with circles representing question types. Since the link does not show how performance improved for a certain type of question, is this the right way to use lsatq?

Honestly, I haven't used lsatqa in a year... I don't know what changes they made since then, and honestly I don't remember it very well.

It'd be helpful to hear where prephrasing an answer occurs in your approach to handle LR. It appears that pre-phrasing is more aligned with stem-first style of handling LR and actively picking the right answer instead of elimination approach to get to the right answer. At the same time, it may not be possible or worth the extra seconds to prephrase answers for harder questions or questions other than parallel/main point.

jmjm wrote:It'd be helpful to hear where prephrasing an answer occurs in your approach to handle LR. It appears that pre-phrasing is more aligned with stem-first style of handling LR and actively picking the right answer instead of elimination approach to get to the right answer. At the same time, it may not be possible or worth the extra seconds to prephrase answers for harder questions or questions other than parallel/main point.

I never did an official "pre-phrase" type stuff, just kind of thought in my head what the gap was. I don't think the stem first approach or the stim first approach really matters when it comes to prephrasing.

This advice seems awesome. Really, thank you. I'm not retaking until October 2014, but I've already ordered the Manhattan LR/RC books and cracked opened my LGB for the first time since February for some obsessive pre-studying.

Also, I had the same diagnostic/first score as OP, so I'm pretty sure a 179 is all but inevitable.